Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38351661›Full record

ArticleBioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology2024

Are non-protein coding RNAs junk or treasure?: An attempt to explain and reconcile opposing viewpoints of whether the human genome is mostly transcribed into non-functional or functional RNAs.

Nils G Walter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Molecular drivers of RNA phase separation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Nils G WalterCenter for RNA Biomedicine, Single Molecule Analysis Group, Department of Chemistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7301-1275

Funding

The RNA nanomachines of the gene expression machinery dissected at the single molecule levelR35GM131922 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI NILS G WALTER · 2019 to 2026
$6.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM131922NIH HHS GM131922
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The human genome project's lasting legacies are the emerging insights into human physiology and disease, and the ascendance of biology as the dominant science of the 21st century. Sequencing revealed that >90% of the human genome is not coding for proteins, as originally thought, but rather is overwhelmingly transcribed into non-protein coding, or non-coding, RNAs (ncRNAs). This discovery initially led to the hypothesis that most genomic DNA is "junk", a term still championed by some geneticists and evolutionary biologists. In contrast, molecular biologists and biochemists studying the vast number of transcripts produced from most of this genome "junk" often surmise that these ncRNAs have biological significance. What gives? This essay contrasts the two opposing, extant viewpoints, aiming to explain their bases, which arise from distinct reference frames of the underlying scientific disciplines. Finally, it aims to reconcile these divergent mindsets in hopes of stimulating synergy between scientific fields.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanRNA, UntranslatedHumansProteinsProteinsRNA, Untranslatedbacterial riboswitchesbiological functionevolutionary selectiongene expression & regulationgenetics and genomicshuman genomenon‐protein coding RNA

Identifiers

PMID38351661
PMCPMC12926872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.